Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

This might be random or something, but would anyone be able to point out a moe-type character/actor from a western film? I know moe is a Japanese term, but I would probably understand it more IF there's a westernish movie that has a character similar to that. Or maybe even a western cartoon.

This might be random or something, but would anyone be able to point out a moe-type character/actor from a western film? I know moe is a Japanese term, but I would probably understand it more IF there's a westernish movie that has a character similar to that. Or maybe even a western cartoon.

Flame Princess from Adventure Time

Yeah ok, not a great example, but she does have certain traits like shyness and hopelessness that can make you want to hug her and just tell her everything will be alright. And hopefully not burn to death while doing so. And she's kinda tsundere.

This might be random or something, but would anyone be able to point out a moe-type character/actor from a western film? I know moe is a Japanese term, but I would probably understand it more IF there's a westernish movie that has a character similar to that. Or maybe even a western cartoon.

Go watch that show with the ponies.

__________________

~"I think 'DINOSAUR' might be one of my favorite words for a punchline."~

To get a pretty good sense of this debate, I would suggest starting here, and continuing from there.

Now, I will reply to relentlessflame's latest post on the topic, and shift it over here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by relentlessflame

What about "cute boys doing cute things"? Do the characters have to look human-like (what about cute personified animals)? And what is "cute", anyway? What if the girl isn't cute, but still does something cute (is that "gap moe")? Are all cute girls doing cute things necessarily "moe", or is it just certain cute girls doing certain cute things? If a real life baby does something cute, is that moe? How is "moe" distinct from "cute" anyway in that case? What about anime from the 70s and 80s that featured cute girls doing cute things; were those moe too? Are shows aimed at young girls that feature cute girls doing cute things all moe anime?

However, I stand by my key point - There will be disagreements on what is and isn't moe on the periphery. Some of your questions will likely become points of debate in ascertaining which scenes are moe, which characters are moe, which anime shows are moe.

But some anime shows are more clear-cut. K-On's main cast is widely viewed as moe. We see this by how they've done in moe competitions, and by what both fans and critics of the show have to say about it.

To use more recent examples, nobody would seriously argue that Saki Achiga-hen or that Love Live! lacks moe.

I think that moe is pretty subjective, and up to debate and personal interpretation, once we get beyond clear-cut cases of it. But there are clear-cut cases of it.

Wiki isn't perfect of course. They can get some things wrong. But they're generally not this far off. Wiki would be almost 100% wrong here if moe is strictly a feeling. Most of what Wiki presents here is total gibberish if moe is strictly a feeling. If moe is strictly a feeling, then what the heck is "moe media"? Wiki even puts forward rough estimates for what the total commercial value of "moe media" was for Japan in 2004.

And let's look at this quote of John Oppliger, taken straight from the Wiki write-up on Moe (slang):

As the first decade of the 2000s unfolded, moé became increasing popular and recognized, invoking a commercial interest in manufacturing and exploiting moé. As this process occurred, moé evolved from being a non-sexual desire to hug, love, and protect to being a sexually sublimated fascination with cuteness. Moé shifted entirely from a two-way interchange between character and viewer to becoming distinctly a characteristic of particular characters or a focused fetish of viewers. Particularly anime including K-On, Lucky Star, and Moetan deliberately revolved around adorable, whimsical, clumsy, early-adolescent girl characters in order to evoke, enflame, and manipulate the interests and affections of viewers. These characters no longer evoked moé feelings; they were literally moé characters – not characters that naturally and unconsciously evoked a paternal reaction from viewers, but rather characters that were the physical manifestation of the defining characteristics of the moé movement. These girl characters were adorably cute, just a bit sexually appealing, and self-conscious but not yet cynical. They demanded notice and adoration from viewers rather than passively earning adoration and protective feelings.

------------------------------------------

This is from one of the world's most commonly used and referenced information databases - Wikipedia. And it completely disagrees with those who argue that Moe (slang) is strictly a feeling.

With even Wiki saying this about moe, its a losing battle to try to convince people that moe is strictly a feeling.

So my position is that we might as well adapt to how the world sees "Moe (slang)", since otherwise the world will define what we love for us (I myself have some quibbles with the precise wording of what I quoted above, but you're not going to effectively correct/combat it by insisting that moe is strictly a feeling, imo). And having non-fans define what you love for you usually doesn't work out that well.

The explanation for that wikipedia article (which I've seen cited before) is very straightforward: Oppliger is wrong!
Let me be honest with you here: your arguments are backwards. Your conclusion (moe isn't "just a feeling") is also your premise.
I agree that moe being "just a feeling" is a bit of simplification, sure! I'd rather claim that it instead involves "the relationship between characters and audience".
Some people will find some characters in a given show to be moe. Some people will find all the characters in a given show to be moe. That doesn't mean that "moe shows" are a thing that exist, that they are a category worth defining.

Just to show that even people within the industry have a hard time grasping moe,there's this quote from this interview (article in french) with Yamaga Hiroyuki, on of the founders of gainax who's still a producer there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yamaga Hiroyuki

K-on! is not moe,it's a refreshing work with pretty girls in it

I seriously hate the interviewer for not following up with a "what the hell do you mean?" question

Just to show that even people within the industry have a hard time grasping moe,there's this quote from this interview (article in french) with Yamaga Hiroyuki, on of the founders of gainax who's still a producer there.

Hey now, maybe he really doesn't feel moe for the K-On girls and he finds other characters like Kaiji or Anarchy Panty to be moe.

.... nakige/utsuge/moege (I am ABSOLUTELY NOT making that term up, BTW) come to mind as moe genres.

Continued from that other thread.

Nakige's and utsuge's don't have to have moe elements. Because those 2 genres only describe stories with tragic elements in them that causes the reader to sympathize with the characters to the point of making the reader cry or even depress.
The "moege" term was quite debated if it can be considered an actual genre and i don't think it's used that much by people. Because in a way almost every eroge can be considered a moege if you just go by the character designs and that label itself pretty much tells nothing about the eroge itself.

As for the other discussion
Let's assume that we can call moe a genre, what does it even tell us about a show?
-The characters (or most of them) in the show are moe?
Almost every animes have "moe" characters , including shows that are genre wise very different from eachother like Shakugan no Shana, NGE, TTGL, Kore wa zombie desku ka. In short it doesn't mean much.
-It has moe characters are doing cute things?
That seems more like an element of a slice of life or sometimes a comedy for me.

Overall i am disagreeing on the socalled moe genre, because that label doesn't tell us anything about a show but rather the character designs/traits of the show

Wiki isn't perfect of course. They can get some things wrong. But they're generally not this far off. Wiki would be almost 100% wrong here if moe is strictly a feeling. Most of what Wiki presents here is total gibberish if moe is strictly a feeling. If moe is strictly a feeling, then what the heck is "moe media"? Wiki even puts forward rough estimates for what the total commercial value of "moe media" was for Japan in 2004.

I think you've misunderstood my central premise. This isn't about "moe is only a feeling and all other uses are absolutely incorrect". It's not like I'm an authority on linguistics, nor in any position to determine the way words will be used by people. (Note that Wikipedia identifies it as "slang"; slang is something that just happens and takes on a life of its own. It's not necessarily inappropriate for Wikipedia to try to capture the way it is being used as slang, or for people like John to postulate about it.) What I'm talking about is how useful the word has proven to be when used in various ways.

When used to describe a feeling, my impression is that its meaning is generally understood. This is the core meaning of the word. But when used in a derivative way to try to describe anything else (a trait, a character, a franchise, a genre), I have observed that it causes more confusion than it solves because the root word is too nebulous. At first it seems so simple ("it's the thing these three shows have in common!" or "it's a collection of these identifiable list of traits!"), but it's nearly impossible to draw the boundaries of where it stops. And in the end you have endless arguments about "this is moe" and "this isn't moe", and no one can possibly be right because, at its core, moe is a feeling not a fact.

This is why I posed all those rhetorical questions. You might think you've got it all figured out and can answer all the questions and organize everything into nice boxes of "this is moe" and "this is not moe". And no doubt you'll appeal to everyone to just "be honest" that "this is what the world thinks", as you've been doing so far. But you will never get "the world" to agree with you, because no clear common definition exists. People who "don't like moe" already have a personal definition that encompasses a broad cross-section of things they dislike (and, I've noticed, tends to conveniently exclude things they do like, or just think shouldn't count). People who "do like moe" don't usually confine themselves to some artificial box that says "survey says these shows are designed to make you feel this way", and placing things in a "moe box" has little-to-no meaning as a distinguishing factor. And whatever line you propose on the "is-it-or-isn't-it" front, someone can argue -- and probably will -- that there's a clear precedent that things on the other side of the line should be included. Even if you write "RRR's Moe Media Manifesto", no one will follow it.

So all this is why I've been saying all along: it's futile. It's not that people aren't using the term however they're trying to use it, it's that the way people are using the term has no clear meaning. Of course, you can think I'm full of shit and that you will succeed where countless others have tried and failed. But I'm not saying this out of some sort of stubborn resistance to "oh no, they're putting a box around my 'favourite genre' and that's bad for me somehow!" I'm just fully convinced, by all the dozens and dozens of debates about this I've followed and participated in over the years, that it'll never work. It always goes the same way: someone thinks they have a clear idea, other people come in and muddy the waters, and in the end the only thing that can be agreed-upon is that moe is at least a feeling, and people will like what they like.

Again, just so I'm clear about my core point: futility of the argument, not invalidation of the slang (which can't truly be invalidated anyway).

I'm with Triple_R here. If you can't define moe, the critics and haters are perfectly willing to define it for you.

Those of you who have known me for a while know that I consider myself a moe fan and I like to combat negative stereotypes of "moe fans". Which some claim don't exist.

Well, guess what? When some guy comes and tells you that moe fans only like childish girls because they can't handle real women, and tries to cite the popularity of characters like Yui and Ayu as evidence, telling them "moe fans don't exist" isn't useful. These people know exactly what they're attacking, and likely their audience does too. On the other hand, pointing out that there's a solid chance those fans they're talking about also like Hitagi Senjougahara and Rin Tohsaka is useful. Personally, I'd combine it with a statement about what I think of the characters they cite (hint: Yui is far, far from my "perfect woman") in a double pronged attack. And guess what? An appeal to "moe traits" is very useful for showing that those fans probably like Hitagi and Rin. Hence why I think moe fans should know the various ways that something can be designated "moe": they can be very useful.

(And before someone says "they could just deny that moe fans actually like Rin and Hitagi - they could try, but thay'd have to assert this in the face of my saying I'm a moe fan who likes Rin and Hitagi. At the very least I get to call the validity of their criticism into question. Alleging that a construct is a figment of their imagination rather than real does nothing to invalidate their criticism of that construct.)

Second, I take pride in liking these "moe shows" some claim don't exist. I'm not audacious enough to try and claim NGE or TTGL (though I'm totally willing to claim some of their characters). I am, however, enthusiastic to lay claim to stuff like Crime Edge, Red Data Girl, Utawarerumono, Haruhi, Bakemonogatari, and Spice and Wolf - to name just a few. I see little reason to back down because someone might disagree with how I delineate the moe world.

In all seriousness I actually really dislike the word "moe" used in an unironic fashion because it often tends to ascribe qualities of helplessness and incompetence to female characters. I find this sexist and offensive.

A lot of people just seem to use "moe" interchangeably with cute or adorable. This is not correct. "Moe" is supposed to evoke the desire to protect and shelter in a (usually) male viewer/reader.

In all seriousness I actually really dislike the word "moe" used in an unironic fashion because it often tends to ascribe qualities of helplessness and incompetence to female characters. I find this sexist and offensive.

A lot of people just seem to use "moe" interchangeably with cute or adorable. This is not correct. "Moe" is supposed to evoke the desire to protect and shelter in a (usually) male viewer/reader.

tl;dr: I don't like "moe" but I like Badass Adorable.

Because wanting to protect someone implies that they are helpless? Give me a break. There is certainly misogyny in the anime world, just like anywhere else, but this is just laughable. Is it sexist when you have your typical whiny shonen protagonist A who gets helped by some strong willed woman?

You don't have to like shows that pander to moe, but don't give me this crap about sexism.

A lot of people just seem to use "moe" interchangeably with cute or adorable. This is not correct. "Moe" is supposed to evoke the desire to protect and shelter in a (usually) male viewer/reader.

"Desire to protect" is hardly the only way that the feeling of moe has been conceptualized. For example, there's Patrick Galbraith (by way of Wikipedia): "a rarefied pseudo-love for certain fictional characters (in anime, manga, and the like) and their related embodiments." And I'm rather fond of one I found on a no longer active site: "the want to dote upon someone". Though if you asked me to describe the feeling, I'd say it manifests in a warm gut feeling and general giddiness. Which can and is evoked by a hell of a lot more than weakness or helplessness. At least for me.

Which begs the question: are feelings based definitions of moe necessarily any more universal than traits based conceptions?